skin tests versus blood tests

My allergist, now retired :(, used a test system called "provocation." Where his nurses would inject a little of the food into you and see the reaction, then determine the dose of your antigens by reversing the reaction.

that would be skin testing with a blood test to follow up on because the doctors can see the skin right away.

I just went through the patch test, skin test and the blood test and the blood test was the only thing that showed any allergies at all. I have eczema and was very badly broken out and they had to keep me on steroids just so my back would clear up enough for the patches to be placed, the steroids nullified the results, which was a risk, then the patch test were nullified too. The blood test was the only thing not affected by the steroids. Before I left my doctors office I got a print out all everything and saw how they test was broke down. I know there are more things I'm allergic to because I'm still responding to something even though I quit eating everything they said I was allergic to. My husband and I think that I might be allergic to the artificial colors and flavors (I know I'm allergic to artificial vanilla and aspartame)but the doctor said they don't even have a test for the artificial ingredients.

Both my children have food allergies and though my son's skin and blood both confirm potentially fatal peanut and tree nut allergies. But with my daughter she had a reaction to fish, positive reaction to skin test but her blood work was negative:( It is truly frustrating but to err on the side of caution (and using common sense because I saw that child react to those fish sticks) I accepted 2 out of 3 positive results.